State isn't ready to approve Google's cars without a backup control system.

Traditionally, Google's self-driving car prototypes have taken existing cars from manufacturers like Toyota and Lexus and bolted on the self-driving car components. This is less than ideal, since it limits the design possibilities of the car's "vision" system and includes (eventually) unnecessary components, like a steering wheel and pedals.

Further Reading

No accelerator or brake pedals, either; self-driving is fully realized.

However, Google recently built a self-driving car of its own design, which had no human control system other than a "go" button. The California DMV has now thrown a speed bump in Google's car design, though, in the form of new testing regulations that require in-development self-driving cars to allow a driver to take “immediate physical control” if needed.

The new law means Google's self-designed car will need to have a steering wheel and gas and brake pedals while it is still under development. According to The Wall Street Journal, Google will comply with the law by building a "small, temporary steering wheel and pedal system that drivers can use during testing" into the prototype cars. The report says California officials are working on rules for cars without a steering wheel and pedals, but for now, a human control system is mandatory.

Self-driving cars have the potential to change the way automobiles are made, and Google's prototype car was just the first step toward that future. Cars today are built to crash, with tons of metal reinforcement, crumple zones, seat belts, and a million air bags. When everything is self-driving, and cars never (or at least rarely) crash, most of that safety equipment can be ripped out, resulting in a much lighter, more fuel-efficient vehicle. You also don't really need headlights, windows, or mirrors, since all of those are human vision assistants. All of these things make sense in a fully autonomous future, but lawmakers will have a tricky time deciding when that changeover can happen.

Google has taken a few steps toward that future with its self-designed electric vehicle, and while adding a steering wheel and pedals will dial the futurism back a notch, the cars are still beneficial in other ways. Google made the front and back of the car nearly flat, giving the roof-mounted LIDAR and other sensors a less-obstructed view of things around the car. The ground-up design also allowed Google to embed sensors in an optimal position without worrying about mounting them to an existing structure. The cars are even fully electric, allowing Google to test its cars while causing a minimal carbon footprint.

Another interesting tidbit in the WSJ mentions Google's desire to explore self-driving vehicles in other form factors. Google petitioned the DMV to allow it to test automated trucks and motorcycles on the public roads, but the DMV declined.

The report says Google hopes to put regular drivers in autonomous cars in "a couple of years," and the company is thinking that the cars would be valuable when provided as a service—like an automated taxi. Claire Hughes Johnson, a Google self-driving car executive, was quoted as saying "You may not be able to buy one, but you may be able to drive in one in the next five years."

Update: We've updated this post to clarify that the steering wheel and pedals are only required for self-driving cars that are still in development. The California DMV rules will allow for consumer versions of autonomous cars without direct controls.

As someone who has to drive in Austin, TX, this can't come soon enough. Basic driving concepts, like 'going the speed limit,' 'stopping at stop signs,' 'stopping at red lights,' and 'not tailgating' are apparently beyond so many drivers here, that taking physical control of the car away from them is probably the best way to keep people safe and get us to where we need to go in a timely fashion.

I wonder why they require it. Google's self driving cars are less safe with someone driving it. The only accidents they've ever encountered is with a human using a steering wheel and pedals.

What's more, studies have shown that unless you're actively driving (paying complete attention) anyway, there's no way you'd have the reaction time needed to take over if something went wrong. There's no way you're going to read a book while riding in one of these and take over in an emergency.

Don't need headlights or windows? I beg to differ. Non self driving cars will remain on the roads for a very long time. And this doesn't even include pedestrians and bicycles. Self driving cars will need to be visible to everyone else at night or in heavy fog. Lights aren't just for illumination for the driver, they increase visibilty for everyone else. And I hope you don't get carsick in a vehicle that has no windows.

So true. In other areas of the developing world (India, China, etc) little 100cc motorcycles are more utilitarian in that they are used as a sole mode of transportation. In the US and more developed countries, motorcycles are almost exclusively used for recreation. So you're going to automate and remove all the fun from an purely optional and recreational activity?

Not as unusual as it sounds. The Docklands Light Rail system in London is driverless, just worked by a "Conductor". The conductor can, if neccessary, use the manual controls in the centre of the vehicle set to control the train.

"Cars today are built to crash, with tons of metal reinforcement, crumple zones, seat belts, and a million air bags. When everything is self-driving, and cars never (or at least rarely) crash, most of that safety equipment can be ripped out, resulting in a much lighter, more fuel-efficient vehicle."

Were Google to pursue this goal with its usual arrogance, I think we'd see mangled corpses being "ripped out" of piles of twisted plastic. Thankfully, our elected officials won't find it "tricky" at all to apply the brakes. Until they get the last human-driven car/truck/SUV off the road, and find a solution to freight transport, too, this is science fiction.

It seems to me that if they want to feel like they're doing something they should just legislate the liability. Whatever they do it's the liable parties who have an incentive to effectively prevent accidents, and legislating technology is more likely to make things less safe by accidentally prohibiting technology that improves things. So instead of legislating technology they should stick to doing things less likely to cause harm.

Being a sysadmin I can never see myself letting the car drive itself. I wouldn't be able to go anywhere on patch day without searching the net for "patch 6.11.3.456 crashed" even though it seems google cars are safer when driven by machines so far, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/g ... w-car.html one wonders what happens when a larger sample size enters the study

Why a steering wheel and not a control stick? I'm assuming the control is "drive by wire". So the wheels are directed to turn and a motor pivots the wheel to the correct direction. So have a control stick on the center console area. Maybe it can retract into a storage position so its not visible except when needed. I'm just guessing here. I have real knowledge as to how the Google car works. If you think about it, the steering column and the axle adds a huge amount of weight to the vehicle. Of course, I don't know if I will ever be able to accept an auto pilot on an auto. An aircraft I can handle. The amount of time/money/thinking spent in development of those systems I doubt will be done in an auto.

Why a steering wheel and not a control stick? I'm assuming the control is "drive by wire". So the wheels are directed to turn and a motor pivots the wheel to the correct direction. So have a control stick on the center console area. Maybe it can retract into a storage position so its not visible except when needed. I'm just guessing here. I have real knowledge as to how the Google car works. If you think about it, the steering column and the axle adds a huge amount of weight to the vehicle. Of course, I don't know if I will ever be able to accept an auto pilot on an auto. An aircraft I can handle. The amount of time/money/thinking spent in development of those systems I doubt will be done in an auto.

I would say part of it is that the DMV wants people to be able to comfortably take control if necessary. People are familiar with controlling a car with a steering wheel, not a joystick, so it seems logical that in an emergency using what people know would work best.

This is still a testing and learning vehicle right? Last I'd read, they still haven't gotten to inclement weather conditions yet. So yeah, I completely agree with this. Lets not go ditching the manual everything until everything has matured. Especially when the testing is being done on public roads.

It's amazing to think that our children will probably never need to get a driver's licence.

Unlikely. My issue with zero driver training and zero manual controls is...what happens if something damages the sensors the thing needs to operate? It looks like the bulk of them is in the roof housing...what happens if a rock bounces up and damages it to the point of inopperability?

What happens if you need to park somwhere off road? Sure most people don't do a lot of off roading, but I am sure I probably park in a grass parking lot at least a couple of times a year at county fairs, music festivals, etc. Or maybe you need to do something like keep circling the block waiting to pick someone up?

I am not saying all of these are completely insurmountable, but I think on the whole there will be SOME measure of manual control needed for both safeties sake and also for situations where no autonomous vehicle is likely to be able to manage the situation well.

Another example, over the weekend I picked up 12 bags of mulch and I really didn't want to take the 6 trips with a wheel barrow it would have taken to haul them to the planter I was going to cover. So I drove my car in to my back yard and backed up to the planter bed, heaved them out and then parked my car in my garage.

I doubt a "self driving" car would have been able to do that at all.

That said, 98% of the time, a self driving car could probably do exactly what I wanted it to, possibly safer than I could do it. That 2% though is a real B.

I wonder why they require it. Google's self driving cars are less safe with someone driving it. The only accidents they've ever encountered is with a human using a steering wheel and pedals.

Got to make someone responsible so they can issue warrants and sue someone. Probably attorneys at work. It is possible for these cars to drive without any human passengers. Not sure what good the steering wheel would be in that case? Just throw your dog in there and have it drive up to the vet for drop off. Send empty car to school to pickup kid?

I do not understand how you are supposed to control a car with no steering when you are doing things other than driving on the road.

Like how do I park my self driving car in front of the door to my self storage unit?

How do I pull up next to the key pad to type in my achess code?

How do I pull into somebody's yard to park at a college football game or family gathering?

How do I stop beside the road or another car to chat with a friend or possibly pick them up (this seems to be a black person thing, lol)?

How do I pull into the narrow bridge of the driveway of my late grandmother's derelict house in the country?

I don't see how steering wheels will ever go away without incredibly good AI and even then it is often easier to just do than to explain what to do.

How do any of those activities benefit Google and its advertising partners? Your concerns are irrelevant.

PS: If you don't think this is going to be a literal "advertising vehicle," you're naive. They're already talking about having advertisers pay for your ride to the mall, and inundating you with commercials the entire trip.

When everything is self-driving, and cars never (or at least rarely) crash, most of that safety equipment can be ripped out

Unless manual control of road going vehicles is fully banned, that safety gear is critical. It's not only for when a human crashes their own car, but for when someone crashes into you. Which I've seen plenty of, since the Northeast gets plenty icy in the winter.

"Cars today are built to crash, with tons of metal reinforcement, crumple zones, seat belts, and a million air bags. When everything is self-driving, and cars never (or at least rarely) crash, most of that safety equipment can be ripped out, resulting in a much lighter, more fuel-efficient vehicle."

Were Google to pursue this goal with its usual arrogance, I think we'd see mangled corpses being "ripped out" of piles of twisted plastic. Thankfully, our elected officials won't find it "tricky" at all to apply the brakes. Until they get the last human-driven car/truck/SUV off the road, and find a solution to freight transport, too, this is science fiction.

Despite all the prophecies and claims of the '60s and '70s, airbags did not replace safety belts, and long after airbags became standard on all cars we got mandatory seatbelt laws. Self-driving cars will not eliminate highway fatalities. I don't care how good your self-driving car is, it can still be T-boned at an intersection by someone running a red light, or hit head-on by some drunk crossing the centerline.

Why a steering wheel and not a control stick? I'm assuming the control is "drive by wire". So the wheels are directed to turn and a motor pivots the wheel to the correct direction. So have a control stick on the center console area. Maybe it can retract into a storage position so its not visible except when needed. I'm just guessing here. I have real knowledge as to how the Google car works. If you think about it, the steering column and the axle adds a huge amount of weight to the vehicle. Of course, I don't know if I will ever be able to accept an auto pilot on an auto. An aircraft I can handle. The amount of time/money/thinking spent in development of those systems I doubt will be done in an auto.

You can do drive by wire with a steering wheel too.

A joystick is significantly less precise than a steering wheel is. Ars actually had a nice article about why we are still using such gouche things like steering wheels and pedals still, instead of buttons and joysticks.

Finer control being chief among them. Even for occasional manual operation a joystick stinks as a method of control for a car.

You could always have a steering wheel that pulls forward and recesses in to the dash when not in use. Need to use it? Grab it and pull it towards you and it activates manual driving mode.

Ron Amadeo / Ron is the Reviews Editor at Ars Technica, where he specializes in Android OS and Google products. He is always on the hunt for a new gadget and loves to rip things apart to see how they work.